If you believe certain words, you believe their hidden arguments. When you believe something is right or wrong, true of false, you believe the assumptions in the words which express the arguments. Such assumptions are often full of holes, but remain most precious to the convinced.

While the Kosa is popularly used as a Sarvastivada text, be careful, because it was roundly criticized by the Sarvastivadins at the time (esp. Sanghabhadra) as misrepresenting the school.

It's popularity in English language Buddhist studies is partly due to it's role in Tibetan Buddhism, and now the fact that a Sanskrit version exists. The other key Sarvastivada Abhidharma literature mainly only survives in Chinese. This is part of the reason why a number of the above studies are from Chinese scholars, eg. Bhante Dhammajoti and his students at HKU. I see that the material from "Korin" is also perhaps largely based on Bhante's lectures. (He teaches a course in this each year at HKU, alternating topics each year, so he constantly covers new material.)

As far as I know, a Ven. Sangpo at Gampo Abbey has recently, or shall soon, put out a new English translation of the whole text. He's been consulting with Bhante about this for a while.

In the end, the Mahavibhasa is really the text where the Sarvastivada is at. Good luck reading it, you'll need it!

~~ Huifeng

PS: Just noticed a got a thanks in some of "Korin's" material too... Don't know what I did to deserve that, but anyway...

If you believe certain words, you believe their hidden arguments. When you believe something is right or wrong, true of false, you believe the assumptions in the words which express the arguments. Such assumptions are often full of holes, but remain most precious to the convinced.

Huifeng wrote:In the end, the Mahavibhasa is really the text where the Sarvastivada is at. Good luck reading it, you'll need it!

~~ Huifeng

PS: Just noticed a got a thanks in some of "Korin's" material too... Don't know what I did to deserve that, but anyway...

Does anyone know if there is any on-going translation work on the Mahavibhasa? Karl Potter's VII of the Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies (Abhidharma Buddhism to 150 A.D.) includes a 56 page summary of the Mahavibhasa based on works by Ryogen Fukuhara (translated by Shohei Ichimura), Poussin (translated by Robert Buswell & Collett Cox) and Kosho Kawamura. If anyone has links to a more substantial summary of the text, do share it here - it will be much appreciated.

Venerable - yes, I noticed Korin's nod to you too. Do you know Korin personally?

If you believe certain words, you believe their hidden arguments. When you believe something is right or wrong, true of false, you believe the assumptions in the words which express the arguments. Such assumptions are often full of holes, but remain most precious to the convinced.

Massive dharma-data-dumps disguised as "study notes", the evils of the modern age! I should know, I've made more than a few myself! mwahahaha! (Luckily, I've managed to destroy much of the evidence, hehe.)

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... himan.htmlTheravada orthodoxy thus maintains that the Abhidhamma Pitaka is authentic Word of the Buddha, in this respect differing from an early rival school, the Sarvastivadins. This school also had an Abhidhamma Pitaka consisting of seven books, considerably different in detail from the Theravada treatises. According to the Sarvastivadins, the books of the Abhidhamma Pitaka were composed by Buddhist disciples, several being attributed to authors who appeared generations after the Buddha. The Theravada school, however, holds that the Blessed One himself expounded the books of the Abhidhamma, except for the detailed refutation of deviant views in the Kathavatthu, which was the work of the Elder Moggaliputta Tissa during the reign of Emperor Asoka.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... himan.htmlTheravada orthodoxy thus maintains that the Abhidhamma Pitaka is authentic Word of the Buddha, in this respect differing from an early rival school, the Sarvastivadins. This school also had an Abhidhamma Pitaka consisting of seven books, considerably different in detail from the Theravada treatises. According to the Sarvastivadins, the books of the Abhidhamma Pitaka were composed by Buddhist disciples, several being attributed to authors who appeared generations after the Buddha. The Theravada school, however, holds that the Blessed One himself expounded the books of the Abhidhamma, except for the detailed refutation of deviant views in the Kathavatthu, which was the work of the Elder Moggaliputta Tissa during the reign of Emperor Asoka.

Any opinion on this Jnana?

Well, I personally don't believe that "the Blessed One himself expounded the books of the Abhidhamma." But even more importantly, I don't think it's very useful to make such claims in this day and age. I consider all of the extant treatises and commentaries on the Nikāyas & Āgamas -- Theravāda, Sarvāstivāda, Sautrāntika, Lokottaravāda, etc. -- to be valuable insofar as they comment on difficult points and passages from the canonical sūtras. Moreover, they offer us some insight into the historical development of Buddhist doctrines. But they also contain a whole lot of excessive, trivial minutia that isn't relevant to any pragmatic practice or interpretation of the sūtras.

Huifeng wrote:While the Kosa is popularly used as a Sarvastivada text, be careful, because it was roundly criticized by the Sarvastivadins at the time (esp. Sanghabhadra) as misrepresenting the school.

It is important as it is a response to the Kośa-bhāṣya from an orthodox Vaibāṣika view point and we still have it (although only partially) in Sanskrit. It is a little hard to find though but well worth the effort!

If you believe certain words, you believe their hidden arguments. When you believe something is right or wrong, true of false, you believe the assumptions in the words which express the arguments. Such assumptions are often full of holes, but remain most precious to the convinced.

If you believe certain words, you believe their hidden arguments. When you believe something is right or wrong, true of false, you believe the assumptions in the words which express the arguments. Such assumptions are often full of holes, but remain most precious to the convinced.